Bingo! what do you want it to do? Is what you want acceptable to all interested parties? If yes how do you do it? We are done. Go have a scotch.
On 1/26/08, Thom McMahon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Customers other than the Gov. have different expectations today. Most will > probably only own the building for 10-20 years, and then it will be obsolete > to its original purpose, and torn down or totally renovated, including the > fire sprinkler system.(Seen any empty Wal-Mart's just down the street from a > new one lately?) > So maybe we should be asking our customers how long they want it to last. I > think in most cases the answer will be "Until I sell it". > > Thom McMahon > Firetech, Inc. > 2560 Copper Ridge Dr > Steamboat Springs, CO 80488-2136 > Tel: 970-879-7952 > Fax: 970-879-7926 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ron Greenman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:49 AM > Subject: Re: Fire sprinkler question > > > > Thom, > > > > Yes. And we might have always had MIC but a less virulent strain whose > > effects were not so severe and that we mistook for oxidation. Any > > number of things can cause the problem that we'll never answer fully > > by guessing on the Forum but if the materials we used to use to build > > with met the performance standard and provided a long life that we've > > become used to, and that the newer products meet the same standard but > > we're unhappy about their durability, then perhaps we need to change > > the standards so that the materials we are producing meet our > > expectations. This is why the Fed still specifies schedule 40 for > > branch lines and schedule 10 for mains. They're looking for longevity > > rather than minimum. Just try to be competitive this way on the bid > > before design projects that most of you are involved with. > > > > On 1/26/08, Thom McMahon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> One major reason is that we have water systems that receive far more > >> "Treatment" than in the OLD days. What's the effect of Fluoride? or how > >> about the Chlorine they add, or any of the other chemical soup we call > >> Potable Water. And if your dealing with Non-potable water there could be > >> anything in there. Industrial waste to sewage. Remember "Dilution is the > >> Solution" is still the major practice in this country and the world. We > >> don't remove harmful things from our waters, we just thin them down > >> enough > >> that it won't kill you. (Right Away) I'm willing to bet that while there > >> were some very bad water source's early in this century, that today > >> pollution is far more wide spread. And lets not forget our little genie > >> in > >> the bottle nuclear waster. > >> Hard to nail down a source when there are so many possibilities. > >> > >> Thom McMahon > >> Firetech, Inc. > >> 2560 Copper Ridge Dr > >> Steamboat Springs, CO 80488-2136 > >> Tel: 970-879-7952 > >> Fax: 970-879-7926 > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "art" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: <[email protected]> > >> Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:26 AM > >> Subject: RE: Fire sprinkler question > >> > >> > >> > Ron, If this is true then why are we seeing so many systems develop > >> > holes > >> > in > >> > wet pipe schd 10 systems in 10 years and 8-10 years for dry systems > >> > with > >> > rust thru. The old schd 40 systems lasted for 60-80 years with no > >> > problems > >> > dry system less of course. Is MIC that new that it did not exist in the > >> > 1915-1950 era? > >> > > >> > Art @ATCO > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron > >> > Greenman > >> > Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:07 PM > >> > To: [email protected] > >> > Subject: Re: Fire sprinkler question > >> > > >> > Tom, > >> > > >> > Metallurgy hasn't gone downhill. In fact. like almost all > >> > technologies, the improvements have been exponential in this century, > >> > that again in the last sixty years of the Twentieth, and again in the > >> > preceding one hundred. Remember that in the centuries before the > >> > Industrial Revolution mankind, whether clannish/tribal or politically > >> > organized, was essentially living in a sticks and stones technology. I > >> > would venture that the quality of materials hasn't fallen but rather > >> > that the control of the manufacturing process has improved so much > >> > that guesswork is gone and it's unnecessary to over-build as much as > >> > it used to be to meet minimum levels of quality control. The shift > >> > from pipe schedules to hydraulics is a perfect example. Confidence in > >> > the numbers allows us to design closer to the edge. Confidence in the > >> > manufacturing process allows the manufacturers to meet ASTM minimums > >> > with lighter and lighter walled products. If we find that these > >> > products fail too soon it's the standard that requires adjustment; The > >> > manufacturing process in this case has philosophically approached near > >> > perfection--as close to minimum standard as possible while maintaining > >> > quality control per that standard thus minimizing per unit costs. And > >> > before someone jumps on the emerging nation, sub-standard product > >> > bandwagon, that is a geo-political issue and not a > >> > science/manufacturing technology one.I have the technology to produce > >> > a mild steel product that meets the ASTM minimum to a +/- 0.05% > >> > tolerance and then exceed the standard for galvanizing by being able > >> > to imbed/fuse if you will the zinc/tin into several microns of the > >> > finished product rather than coat the product like paint (Idod's > >> > stuff--and if you haven't already check out their process, > >> > fascinating), either by hot dipping (thick & way expensive) or > >> > electroplating, then I can lower material costs and hence my Earth > >> > footprint while producing a superior product. If I can do that then > >> > anyone can because the technology exists. If on the other hand my > >> > infrastructure is too fragile, if patents intervene, etc. I can still > >> > use old technologies and rely on larger tolerances to maintain quality > >> > control. I could go on with this rant but I'll spare you all. > >> > > >> > On 1/26/08, Tom Duross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> I've tested a few pumps drawing river water in CT and RI as well as MA > >> >> and > >> >> found they have domestic in them off the street by way of a manual > >> >> fill > >> > and > >> >> only see river water when the pump runs. Is this like that? Plus, > >> >> you > >> >> don't see as good a metal product in the past 20+ years as you see in > >> > older > >> >> systems, not just pipe but pumps as well. Metallurgy has gone > >> >> downhill, > >> >> domestic forges closed, quality of ore not what it used to be. > >> >> > >> >> Tom > >> >> Go Pats > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> As another example, I am working on a mill conversion and the > >> >> building and sprinkler system are from 1904. When we changed the 3/4" > >> >> pipe, the internal looked like new pipe. This had been a wet system, > >> >> but was fed by river water. Go figure. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> At 07:41 PM 1/25/2008, you wrote: > >> >> >I agree Tom. Here is what I plan to respond unless I hear words of > >> >> >wisdom from you guys. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > One must accept the fact that there are variables which affect > >> >> > the life of a sprinkler system. They include: > >> >> > > >> >> > Proper original design and installation > >> >> > Proper inspection and testing > >> >> > Whether they are wet, dry, preaction or antifreeze > >> >> > Environmental conditions, like salt air, high humidity, corrosive > >> >> > atmosphere. > >> >> > Presence of microbiologically induced corrosion (MIC) > >> >> > Type of pipe, Schedule 40, thinner wall pipe, galvanized pipe, > >> >> > plastic > >> >> pipe > >> >> > Corrosive nature of the water > >> >> > Earthquake > >> >> > > >> >> > A new or existing wet pipe system which has been tested free of > >> >> > the conditions leading to MIC, and is properly maintained, can > >> >> > pretty much be expected to last for the life of the > >> >> > building. Examples of this are the sprinkler systems at The > >> >> > Presidio and Fort Mason in San Francisco. I know the system at the > >> >> > Headquarters Building at Upper Fort Mason is in the neighborhood of > >> >> > 70 years old. I took apart portions of another 70 year-old > >> >> > sprinkler system in San Francisco, during a building > >> >> > demolition. The exterior and interior of the pipe was like brand > >> >> > new. > >> >> > > >> >> > Dry pipe systems do not have such a good history, mostly because > >> >> > of internal corrosion. I know of no statistics, but would expect > >> >> > at 30 to 40 years. > >> >> > > >> >> > Antifreeze systems will not get proper maintenance, so it is > >> >> > anybody's guess. > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Ron Greenman > >> > at home.... > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > [email protected] > >> > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > >> > > >> > To Unsubscribe, send an email > >> > to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > [email protected] > >> > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > >> > > >> > To Unsubscribe, send an email > >> > to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > >> > > >> > > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > >> > >> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > >> > > > > > > -- > > Ron Greenman > > at home.... > > _______________________________________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > > > To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > -- Ron Greenman at home.... _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
